Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a safeguarding referral for her child. We have already considered some complaints Miss X has raised about this matter. The Council’s apologies appropriately remedy the injustice caused for other parts of Miss X’s complaint. We could achieve nothing more by investigating.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council shared information about her child’s safeguarding case, which caused significant distress. Miss X says the Council told Miss X no further action would be taken, when instead it intended to complete a further assessment. Miss X also raises concerns about inaccurate and contradictory information recorded by the Social Worker allocated to her child’s case. She wants the Council to take disciplinary action against the Social Worker and financial compensation for the distress the Council’s handling has caused.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

4. When we find fault, we can recommend remedies for significant personal injustice, or to prevent future injustice, caused by that fault. We look at organisational fault, not individual professional competence. Decisions about individual’s fitness to practise or work are for the organisations concerned, and for professional regulators, not the Ombudsman. (Local Government Act 1974, s26(1) and s26A(1) as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council apologised to Miss X for mistakenly sharing information about the child and family assessment with her and advising the matter was closed when it was not. I consider the Council’s apology is an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused. There is nothing more we could achieve for Miss X by investigating the matter further.
7. The Council explained it had already considered the other issues Miss X has raised about the actions of the allocated Social Worker under all three stages of the statutory complaints process. We have also considered the Council’s handling under that procedure under case reference 24 021 658. We will not investigate a complaint on matters we have previously considered and decided not to take further.
8. Miss X has complained about specific actions of the allocated Social Worker. Our role is to investigate the Council’s actions as a corporate body, rather than to investigate an individual. If Miss X has concerns about the professionalism or conduct of an individual social worker, she can report his concerns to their professional body, Social Work England. Moreover, Miss X expressed her wish for the Council to take a disciplinary action against the Social Worker. We could not achieve this as disciplinary matters between the Council and its employees fall outside our jurisdiction.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because we could achieve nothing more by investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman